T

[DonnaBe]

Mumsnet has been invaded by a small group of people who are giving out wrong information about the proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act.

They claim that women’s spaces are being invaded and women are being silenced. Please read this and make up your own minds!

A gender Self ID law – like the one proposed in the UK - was recently introduced in Ireland. To change your gender on government records, you need to sign a Statutory Declaration in front of a solicitor and declare that you are living in your acquired gender and intend to stay that way. This is a legal document.

Self ID has not caused problems in Ireland. This is the kind of thing that is being proposed in the UK. It's about making a statement under oath about your acquired gender.

It has been claimed that anyone will be able to claim to be the opposite gender whenever they want. Not true. Nobody is proposing that big blokes with beards can say “I am a woman today” and have legal protection to use women’s loos. If they were, I would be campaigning against it. That is absolutely not what is being proposed

The group behind this campaign are not new. They have been conducting anti-trans campaigns for many years. I don’t think their agenda is women’s welfare so much as expressing their hatred for trans people. The self id proposals have given them an opportunity to attack trans people. Again. They claim they are being silenced, but their views are regularly aired on TV and in the newspapers. And on Mumsnet. They have a right to speak, but I wish they’d tell the truth.

Believe it or not, this all starts with a discussion about marriage. Before 2004, trans people could not marry or stay married because there was no legal way to change the gender on their birth certificates. There was no same sex marriage back then.

The Gender Recognition Act of 2004 introduced the ability to stand in front of a Gender Recognition Panel (cost £140) and get a Gender Recognition Certificate which allowed you to change your birth certificate and get married! This is a bureaucratic arrangement that involves an element of body policing which is not nice.

The proposal now is to replace the GRP / GRC arrangement with a legally binding statutory declaration. Or something like that. That’s all. No whimsical notions like “It’s Friday. I’m a woman today.”

In fact, you can now get married if your transgendered under same sex marriage legislation. So getting a GRC is less relevant. I don’t know if there’s any research on this, but my feeling is most trans people don’t bother getting a GRC anyway.

So this is how things stand today:

There is no law banning men from women’s toilets and changing rooms. There’s only an unwritten rule. The recent Man Friday campaign where women invaded men’s toilets could have the contradictory effect of weakening this rule and end up harming women. The logical conclusion of their campaign is body policing with guards on women’s toilets and women will have to prove their gender before having a pee.

Trans women already use women’s toilets and changing rooms. I do. Nobody notices. I don’t make a song and dance about it. There is no slackening of the law defending women’s spaces because there is no such law. We get on fine without it.

The Gender Recognition Act makes exceptions for things like women’s refuges. These exceptions should be used where appropriate. Already law. Not changing.

You can live in your non-birth gender already. If you pass as that gender well enough, you just do it. You don’t need a law or certificate to do it. Thousands of people live this way and nobody is harmed by it.

Why they quotations around the word women when referring to gender critical women?
Does it come from insecurity?

Nope. It comes from a place of irony. You are sat here stating that you are a woman - but how do we know that? We HAVE laws that protect women. We aren't at a point of total parity as yet, but demonising trans people will not achieve that. If you feel that women are less safe if a trans women is recognised as such, then you are far more fragile than I can imagine.

Women as "milch cows" - what was it the OP said upthread ?

"To deny society is make women prisoners of their biology and to consign us to being brood mares and drudges "

Brood mares, milch cows - the contempt for women and our biology....

Tut Tallulah - I thought it was a direct quote - now I'll be accused of misquoting..
Ah well, back to brow beating the civilians ...

Seriously, MNHQ? A male poster joins here to call women invaders, liars, far right and milch cows and you delete a post identifying this as male pattern abusive behaviour? Seriously?

@Teacuphiccup said really well something I often think, so I'm just going to repeat the whole thing in the hope that that increases the number of people (maybe including incomers from twitter) who read it:

^I despair at how many trans activists really don’t understand what a social construct is.
Yes it means it’s constructed but it’s not constructed in isolation it’s contructed socially, by society.
So for example money is a social construct, we all know that the value of a piece of paper is only worth what we have decided it’s worth. Individually we don’t get to change it, I can’t decide that my £10 is worth £20. Though the value of money does shift and change depending on many factors, £20 will go further in Aberdeen than London for example.

Gender is a social contstruct, we can smash gender norms and reject it but we can’t individually decide they don’t exist. Social constructs are from the outside not the inside. You are not society on your own.

You can say well I’m going to reject gender and live like this but that won’t stop Society putting a gender on you.^

Here's another one:

1) Single charismatic leader.
2) People always seeming constantly happy and enthusiastic. Especially if you discover that they have been told to act that way for the potential new recruits.
3) Instant friends.
4) If you are told who you can or cannot talk to or associate with.
5) They hide what they teach.
6) Say they are the only true group, or the best so why go anywhere else.
7) Hyped meetings, get you to meetings rather than share with you.
8) Experiential rather than logical.
9) Asking for money for the next level.
10) Some cults travel door to door during times when women are home alone. They, and this is rather sexist, think that women are easier to recruit and once they have the woman then it will be easier to snare the husband or partner.
11) Saying that they have to make people pay for it because otherwise they will not appreciate it. This is of course a very silly reason, plenty of people are able to appreciate things which they did not pay for.
12) They do not allow their teachings or practices to be questioned. If you question, then automatically the group assumes that something is wrong with you. It can never be the case that anything is wrong with the group’s practices or teachings. Often they will try to shut you down by accusing you of having a “bad attitude”.
13) They will push you to obey by using guilt. They will demand complete “submission” to the group, its leaders and its teachings. They will do this by making you feel absolutely rotten about yourself. They will ridicule you and attack any weakness you might have (or invent weaknesses you might have if they can’t find any). Their goal is to break your will by causing you mental anguish.

The two things that aren't really on display are the financial ones and the single leader. Though Corbyn is very central to the 'right wing = enemy' thing and there are also numerous celebrity figures / leader figures there.

Cults CAN take over whole societies. See 'history'. The results are not one record as being terribly good for many individuals living in them.

I do wonder why people like Donna claim to not need a GRC, but want to make it easier to obtain one?

If not having a GRC doesn't stop a TIM "living as a women", why the panic at the idea of women discussing the change in the law?

It never goes well does it? If it weren't so damaging for the future rights of women and children, I would just point and laugh. Remember TIM's "ridicule is nothing to be scared of".

you are far more fragile than I can imagine

Well, I would use the word 'vulnerable' rather than 'fragile'. Women are vulnerable to exploitation and violence from males. We deal with it (suffer it, recover from it, work around it, take steps to avoid it) every day of our lives. We have fought for, and built, a few safe spaces which reduce that vulnerability just a little. We aren't going to give them up without a fight.

Seriously, MNHQ? A male poster joins here to call women invaders, liars, far right and milch cows and you delete a post identifying this as male pattern abusive behaviour? Seriously?

Tut, tut Lang, you know not to upset those fragile male egos.

, then you are far more fragile than I can imagine.

Yes, I'm not sure fragile is the right word, as evidenced by the fact that we are being called aggressive and abusive.

But in essence, that's right. Women are vulnerable to men and male violence/imitation/bullying.

If we weren't, we would have parity.

Well done. Perhaps you get it now.

The current GRA includes the requirement for a stat dec:

Section 3:
(4)An application under section 1(1)(a) must also include a statutory declaration by the applicant that the applicant meets the conditions in section 2(1)(b) and (c).

Section 2:
(1)In the case of an application under section 1(1)(a), the Panel must grant the application if satisfied that the applicant—

(a)has or has had gender dysphoria,

(b)has lived in the acquired gender throughout the period of two years ending with the date on which the application is made,

(c)intends to continue to live in the acquired gender until death, and

(d)complies with the requirements imposed by and under section 3.

------
So applicants under the current rules have to provide a stat dec to say they have lived in the acquired gender for 2 years and intend to continue living in that gender until death.

The proposals* are to remove half the stat dec (the two year part) and to remove the requirement for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, or any other evidence.

*UK government still haven't published specific proposals. This is based on the Scottish consultation and the system in Ireland.

Rolls eyes - I have kids - I've used that kind of line before 'I bet you can't show me how good you are at sharing!' 'I know you're not tired, but why not just lie down next to me for a hug for a minute'

We know we're women, and why we're women - trying to get what you want by calling us fragile if we don't do what you want is as transparent as me telling my 4 year old that I bet he's not fast enough to get his clothes into the laundry basket before I can get to the top of the stairs

Well done pencils. You may have a body of a 'weak and feeble' woman, but you have the mind of a shit hot computer.

you are far more fragile than I can imagine

We're not the ones threatening suicide over pronouns ¯\(ツ)/¯

I didn't feel very well this morning, mostly because the lining of my womb is detatching and leaking out of my vagina. HTH.

@Datun @changeypants
No, those are quotations from
@Sunflowersforever's OP at www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3213408-trans-unpeak-moment?pg=1&order=. I'm not personally proposing the counterarguments, I'm talking about the fact that Sunflowersforever hadn't heard them. Doesn't that bother you? Hashtag nodebate works both ways.

You are sat here stating that you are a woman - but how do we know that? We HAVE laws that protect women

For all I know many of the people on this thread are men. I don’t care. It’s an anonymous forum. Usual rules about internet safety can apply, but anyone can post as long as they stick to the site rules. Many men and trans women are gender critical.

If you feel that women are less safe if a trans women is recognised as such, then you are far more fragile than I can imagine.

As has been repeated at length, and as you would understand if you read the thread, women are concerned about violence from men. Feel free to argue that all spaces should be unisex, but please don’t pretend that a certificate can change your sex.

Also, yes some people do sometimes feel fragile for many reasons - so?

I'm a bit frustrated that so many excellent points came up here but the OP didn't/wasn't able to engage with them, when it would have been incredibly interesting.

Haven't RTFT, have you?

Transpires that Debbie wasn't here to discuss, converse or debate. She was here to 'educate'...

@DonnaBe I see you had my post deleted where I said I agree we should tell the truth. Seems you don’t like the truth very much at all.

spoonless

I think not debating is very harmful. Which is why mumsnet allow debate to flourish.

I'm still not exactly sure what your point is. Someone asked a question because they were unaware of some information?

That's how discussion works.

The profile of mumsnet has been raised, precisely due to the fast moving, informed discussion - discussion that is banned elsewhere.

Dozens and dozens of women are now coming onto the site with little information, but lots of questions.

That's all good.

FloraFox, to be fair on Donna, I reckon that there are more than a few lurkers on trans threads with their fingers over the report button.

Aren't there just...

I spend much longer lurking on these threads than posting, and I am always in awe at the patience and kindness of you lot. It’s not “kindness” in that stereotypical nurturing way, it’s the taking the time to explain things in good faith, time and time again.

Mumsnet is great. I have never found a space like it. It has empowered me to do things I never dreamt possible.

I love you all. So much intelligence and humour, I would clasp you all to my bosom, if only it was ample enough.